Iron deficiency, anemia and association with refugee camp exposure among recently resettled refugees: A Canadian retrospective cohort study.

Malnutrition and poor health are common among recently resettled refugees and may be differentially associated with pre-migration exposure to refugee camp versus non-camp dwelling. We aimed to investigate the associations of iron deficiency (ID), anemia, and ID anemia (IDA) with pre-migration refugee camp exposure among recently arrived refugees to Canada. To this end, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of 1032 adult refugees who received care between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2015, within a specialized refugee health clinic in Calgary, Canada. We evaluated the prevalence, severity, and predictors of ID, anemia, and IDA, stratified by sex. Using multivariable logistic regression, we estimated the association of refugee camp exposure with these outcomes, adjusting for age, months in Canada prior to investigations, global region of origin, and parity. Among female refugees, the prevalence of ID, anemia, and IDA was 25% (134/534), 21% (110/534), and 14% (76/534), respectively; among males, 0.8% (4/494), 1.8% (9/494), and 0% (0/494), respectively. Anemia was mild, moderate, and severe in 55% (60/110), 44% (48/110) and 1.8% (2/110) of anemic females. Refugee camp exposure was not associated with ID, anemia, or IDA while age by year (ID OR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.98; anemia OR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-1.00; IDA OR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.94-0.99) and months in Canada prior to investigations (ID OR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.72-1.01; anemia OR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.67-0.97; IDA OR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.64-1.00) were inversely correlated with these outcomes. ID, anemia, and IDA are common among recently arrived refugee women irrespective of refugee camp exposure. Our findings suggest these outcomes likely improve after resettlement; however, given proportionally few refugees are resettled globally, likely millions of refugee women and girls are affected.

Cervical Cancer Screening by Refugee Category in a Refugee Health Primary Care Clinic in Calgary, Canada, 2011-2016.

Newly arrived refugees and refugee claimants experience low cervical cancer screening (CCS) rates in Canada. We investigated CCS at a dedicated refugee clinic. We completed a retrospective cohort study among patients at the Mosaic Refugee Health Clinic in Calgary, Canada, between 2011 and 2016. We investigated CCS offers and completion by refugee category. We then used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the association of CCS screening and refugee category, accounting for sociodemographic and clinical factors. We included 812 refugees. Most were married (71%) and had limited English proficiency (57%). Overall, 88% and 77% of patients were offered and completed screening, respectively. Compared to government assisted refugees, privately sponsored refugees completed CCS more often (OR 1.60, 95% CI [1.02-2.49]). A dedicated refugee clinic may provide effective CCS to newly arrived refugees irrespective of refugee category, insurance status or other barriers.

The MedSafer Study-Electronic Decision Support for Deprescribing in Hospitalized Older Adults: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Scalable deprescribing interventions may reduce polypharmacy and the use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs); however, few studies have been large enough to evaluate the impact that deprescribing may have on adverse drug events (ADEs). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of an electronic deprescribing decision support tool on ADEs after hospital discharge among older adults with polypharmacy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a cluster randomized clinical trial of older (≥65 years) hospitalized patients with an expected survival of more than 3 months who were admitted to 1 of 11 acute care hospitals in Canada from August 22, 2017, to January 13, 2020. At admission, participants were taking 5 or more medications per day. Data analyses were performed from January 3, 2021, to September 23, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Personalized reports of deprescribing opportunities generated by MedSafer software to address usual home medications and measures of prognosis and frailty. Deprescribing reports provided to the treating team were compared with usual care (medication reconciliation). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was a reduction of ADEs within the first 30 days postdischarge (including adverse drug withdrawal events) captured through structured telephone surveys and adjudicated blinded to intervention status. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of patients with 1 or more PIMs deprescribed at discharge and the proportion of patients with an adverse drug withdrawal event (ADWE). RESULTS: A total of 5698 participants (median [range] age, 78 [72-85] years; 2858 [50.2%] women; race and ethnicity data were not collected) were enrolled in 3 clusters and were adjudicated for the primary outcome (control, 3204; intervention, 2494). Despite cluster randomization, there were group imbalances, eg, the participants in the intervention arm were older and had more PIMS prescribed at baseline. After hospital discharge, 4989 (87.6%) participants completed an ADE interview. There was no significant difference in ADEs within 30 days of discharge (138 [5.0%] of 2742 control vs 111 [4.9%] of 2247 intervention participants; adjusted risk difference [aRD] -0.8%; 95% CI, -2.9% to 1.3%). Deprescribing increased from 795 (29.8%) of 2667 control to 1249 (55.4%) of 2256 intervention participants [aRD, 22.2%; 95% CI, 16.9% to 27.4%]. There was no difference in ADWEs between groups. Several post hoc sensitivity analyses, including the use of a nonparametric test to address the low cluster number, group imbalances, and potential biases, did not alter study conclusions. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This cluster randomized clinical trial showed that providing deprescribing clinical decision support during acute hospitalization had no demonstrable impact on ADEs, although the intervention was safe and led to improvements in deprescribing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03272607.

The cost-effectiveness of schistosomiasis screening and treatment among recently resettled refugees to Canada: an economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Many refugees and asylum seekers from countries where schistosomiasis is endemic are infected with the Schistosoma parasite when they arrive in Canada. We assessed, from a systemic perspective, which of the following management strategies by health care providers is cost-effective: testing for schistosomiasis and treating if the individual is infected, treating presumptively or waiting for symptoms to emerge. METHODS: We constructed a decision-tree model to examine the cost-effectiveness of 3 management strategies: watchful waiting, screening and treatment, and presumptive treatment. We obtained data for the model from the literature and other sources, to predict deaths and chronic complications caused by schistosomiasis, as well as costs and net monetary benefit. RESULTS: Presumptive treatment was cost-saving if the prevalence of schistosomiasis in the target population was greater than 2.1%. In our baseline analysis, presumptive treatment was associated with an increase of 0.156 quality-adjusted life years and a cost saving of $405 per person, compared with watchful waiting. It was also more effective and less costly than screening and treatment. INTERPRETATION: Among recently resettled refugees and asylum claimants in Canada, from countries where schistosomiasis is endemic, presumptive treatment was predicted to be less costly and more effective than watchful waiting or screening and treatment. Our results support a revision of the current Canadian recommendations.

A scoping review on the relations between urban form and health: a focus on Canadian quantitative evidence. / Examen de la portée sur les associations entre aménagement urbain et santé : les données quantitatives canadiennes.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the accumulating Canadian evidence regarding the relations between urban form and health behaviours, less is known about the associations between urban form and health conditions. Our study aim was to undertake a scoping review to synthesize evidence from quantitative studies that have investigated the relationship between built environment and chronic health conditions, self-reported health and quality of life, and injuries in the Canadian adult population. METHODS: From January to March 2017, we searched 13 databases to identify peer-reviewed quantitative studies from all years that estimated associations between the objectively-measured built environment and health conditions in Canadian adults. Studies under-taken within urban settings only were included. Relevant studies were catalogued and synthesized in relation to their reported study and sample design, and health outcome and built environment features. RESULTS: Fifty-five articles met the inclusion criteria, 52 of which were published after 2008. Most single province studies were undertaken in Ontario (n = 22), Quebec (n = 12), and Alberta (n = 7). Associations between the built environment features and 11 broad health outcomes emerged from the review, including injury (n = 19), weight status (n = 19), cardiovascular disease (n = 5), depression/anxiety (n = 5), diabetes (n = 5), mortality (n = 4), self-rated health (n = 2), chronic conditions (n = 2), metabolic condi-tions (n = 2), quality of life (n = 1), and cancer (n = 1). Consistent evidence for associations between aggregate built environment indicators (e.g., walkability) and diabetes and weight and between connectivity and route features (e.g., transportation route, trails, pathways, sidewalks, street pattern, intersections, route characteristics) and injury were found. Evidence for greenspace, parks and recreation features impacting multiple health outcomes was also found. CONCLUSION: Within the Canadian context, the built environment is associated with a range of chronic health conditions and injury in adults, but the evidence to date has limitations. More research on the built environment and health incorporating rigorous study designs are needed to provide stronger causal evidence to inform policy and practice.